Afrasianet - A "twist," but it wasn't just a sting. It was a sign of the collapse of respect between US President Donald Trump and his ally on paper, Volodymyr Zelensky, the Ukrainian president who for years has been allied with Western countries in his war against Russia.
The scene was shocking to many, what was yesterday a whisper became a clear quarrel and a sharp disagreement in full view of everyone. Donald Trump has come to change the game forever, and he does not hide his anger on Europe, and the Europeans, in turn, no longer shy away from talking about the tense relationship with America led by Trump.
Before Trump returned to the White House, it was clear from his attitudes that he saw the Joe Biden administration's support for Ukraine as exaggerated, and that the solution was to find a settlement to the conflict between Russia and Ukraine, which he pledged before his election, saying that he would put out the fires in Gaza and Ukraine.
In Gaza, Trump acted as a businessman rather than a head of state, talking about projects and deals, and then moving on to the Ukraine deal.
While hosting Zelensky at the White House, Trump expressed his displeasure with the Ukrainian president's rejection of the ceasefire, which appeared to be a rebuke from a superior to a subordinate, not from a head of state to an allied head of state, to the point where news that Zelensky was fired from the White House and did not voluntarily leave.
Speaking with the Ukrainian president, Trump said that Kiev is in trouble because it does not win the war, and because its soldiers fall over time, reminding Zelensky that he is not in a position to dictate his conditions to Washington, because all his possible cards are mainly related to American support. After this meeting, Trump explicitly said that Zelensky would be welcome if he was ready for peace and a ceasefire.
The incident would not have gone unnoticed, of course, as French President Emmanuel Macron found himself forced to respond, being the president of France, which no longer hides behind its apprehension and fear of the reckless policies of the United States of America and Trump. The French president commented on the altercation, saying that Russia is the aggressor and Ukraine is the aggressor, that those who have been fighting from the beginning should be respected, and that the West was right to help Ukraine and punish Russia 3 years ago, vowing to continue doing so.
Trump.. Return of the old opponent
"For me, it's simple, the world is made up of herbivores and carnivores. If we decide to remain herbivores, the carnivores will triumph and we will be their market."
This is how Emmanuel Macron – French President
Diplomatic cables and common hopes to work for security, prosperity and peace, words of straw that can hardly withstand the new critical situation in Europe. Donald Trump, who 4 years ago left the White House almost miraculously, has returned again, not with war, nor with weapons, nor with anything illegal, but with the votes of voters who chose him and threw behind their backs Kamala Harris, the candidate of the Democratic Party.
The news was not good for Europeans, and they did not hide it even before the start of the electoral battle, and here are their tongues showing the anxiety that dwells in the hearts because of the Republican US president's arrival at the top of the most powerful country in the world.
The first apprehensive voice emerged from Hungary's capital Budapest at last year's European Political Community summit, where Macron took the opportunity to talk about the need for Europeans to take their internal security issues seriously away from the Americans' pledges and sudden volatility.
Macron considered that the current moment is decisive and decisive for Europeans, as the war waged by Putin, as he claims in the east of the continent, the US elections, and Chinese options in terms of technology, give the old continent the opportunity to write history instead of watching other parties write it as their interests dictate. Macron wondered who would defend the Europeans' choices if Americans had chosen someone to defend their interests.
Whoever will defend the Americans, as Emmanuel Macron intended, will be none other than Trump, a man who shows little enthusiasm for Europeans. This is nothing new, but goes back to his first term.
In an interview with the British newspapers "The Times" and "Bild" in January 2017, Donald Trump came out with statements that sparked a lot of controversy, in which he aimed the bullets of his words towards Europe and NATO, and said that Angela Merkel, the former German chancellor, made a catastrophic mistake after flooding Europe with refugees after opening the borders to people fleeing the war in the Middle East, and that Germany should invest in establishing no-fly zones in Syria to protect the Syrian people from bombing instead of hosting Refugees.
Trump's attack did not stop here, but said that the entire European Union is only a tool for Germany, so he supported Britain's decision to leave the Union. In the same interview, Trump argued that Britain's imminent exit from the European Union would be in Her Majesty's interest, expressing his desire to strike a trade deal with London quickly.
Trump's statement is in stark contrast to Barack Obama's previous statement that Britain must accept its place at the bottom of the line if it leaves the European Union in order to sign trade agreements with the United States. After a love affair in Britain, where his Scottish mother hails, Trump said the EU was doomed to collapse because other countries would join the caravan because of the continent's immigration policy.
Trump now has a plan to stop the war in Ukraine, and an idea to end the conflict with China, but he has not given a glimpse of these predictable ideas that will not appeal to Kiev, Paris or Berlin. Despite the danger of Trump's ideas to NATO and, by extension, to relations between Europe and America, the dispute actually dates back years before Trump.
The beginning of this tension was under George W. Bush, who came after Obama to fix what could be fixed, to no avail. In fact, Trump was not the first to say negative words about Germany, as American presidents expressed more diplomatic displeasure with the fact that Europeans, especially Germans, did not spend on arming their armies adequately and relying on NATO.
Masks and submarines. Western conflicts come to light
We Arabs see the West as a single bloc made up of peoples united by the same goals and outlook, and looking to the future with the same concerns and expectations.
But history and the present tell us that the West is not always on the heart of one man, and that the relations of states in it are often purely pragmatic, and if common interests are absent, competition and discord emerge, and these countries may be led among themselves into world wars that have killed millions and destroyed entire countries, as has already happened in the two world wars.
There is no evidence of this from what happened during the outbreak of the Corona pandemic in 2020, when conflicts over masks and ventilators erupted between Western countries.
In this period, the German authorities had officially announced their protest against the "theft" by the United States of two hundred thousand medical masks that Berlin had purchased to confront the epidemic, and the same thing was repeated between America and France, when Valerie Pécresse, president of the "Ile-de-France" region, said that the Americans received at the last minute a shipment of masks that the French were supposed to receive after Washington doubled the financial offer to the manufacturer.
Americans at the time adopted the slogan "America First", which Trump raised in the face of everyone, so it was not surprising that Washington repeated the same movement with a number of French provinces, to the extent of seizing one of the shipments from the runway of a Chinese airport that was supposed to arrive hours later to French territory, despite the denials of American officials.
This was a simple example of possible and present differences that could erupt in times of crisis between Western countries, especially between European countries on the one hand and the United States on the other.
In March 2023, the United States and Britain unveiled the largest submarine deal with Australia, under the AUCOS defence partnership, under which Australians will have access to nuclear-powered submarines.
The aim of the deal, worth $268-368 billion, is for Australia to join the U.S.-UK alliance to encircle China in the Pacific. This deal has led to major problems, as it targets not only China, but to a lesser extent France, which has deliberately distanced itself from AUKUS.
In September 2021, Scott Morrison, the former Australian prime minister, rejected France's charges, and the attack came after Australia decided to cancel a submarine deal it had previously agreed with France, after reaching another deal with the United States and Britain for more advanced submarines.
In a statement to the local press, the former Australian prime minister confirmed that his country told France of its doubts about the submarines that were initially agreed, and that they do not have the capabilities that can be obtained from other countries, and therefore will not serve the goals of the Australian strategy.
The cancellation of the French submarine deal caused outrage in Paris, Macron quickly recalled his ambassador, and France canceled a meeting at the level of the defense ministries of the two countries. In a statement out of diplomatic tact, Jean-Yves Le Drian, a former French foreign minister, said that his country recalled its ambassadors in Canberra and Washington to reassess the situation, while Britain, there was no need to recall its ambassador, because it has always shown opportunism in crowding out French influence.
The submarine dossier clearly revealed the tense relationship hidden by diplomatic smiles, especially between Paris and Washington, especially after Britain left the European Union.
Both sides of the Atlantic. The roots of a troubled relationship
In 1607, Britain established its columns in the first colony in Jamestown, Virginia, after which the longest period of migration from Europe to North America began until the outbreak of the American Revolution in 1775.
Many European immigrants came from Germany and the Netherlands, but the British continued to have the lion's share of immigration to the United States. British migrations were not only economically motivated, but also had some religious motives: areas such as Maryland, New York, and Pennsylvania experienced religious migrations such as the settlement of the British Religious Society of Friends, followed by groups from Northern Ireland and German Protestant sects who came to proselytize.
After the independence of the United States from Britain, Washington did not play central roles in the international system and was satisfied with its influence in the Americas and some regions of East Asia, until the outbreak of World War I, in which the United States took a neutral position at the beginning to ensure economic dealings with the warring parties, providing everyone with food commodities, military equipment and raw materials, despite some difficulties it faced in supplying Germany due to the naval blockade on Berlin.
America continued its policy of restraint, until it intercepted a German telegram destined for Mexico, revealing that the German government had expressed its willingness to help Mexico retake a number of US states (Texas, New Mexico and Arizona). There was no internal American consensus on the issue of entering the world war, especially since the number of German-Americans exceeded 4 million citizens, but neutrality did not last long, and because of Germany's attempts to establish military bases in Latin America, and increase its presence in East Asia, Washington decided Finally alignment with allies.
The United States entered the war in 1917 in two stages, the first when US President Woodrow Wilson announced on February 3, 1917 the severance of diplomatic relations with Germany, and the second during Washington's declaration of war on April 6 against Germany, after German submarines sank merchant ships that caused new material and human losses.
Washington's entry into the war turned the tide, which ended with Germany asking America to mediate with the Allies to negotiate the 14 principles, and then the armistice was signed on November 11, 1918.
During the few months of war in which the United States participated, it made good gains, as it was Europe's number one creditor, and it seized the property of many German-Americans on suspicion of German sympathies.
World War I ended with a more important gain for Washington, which is that European countries began to rely on Washington for many of their military and living needs because of the great losses they suffered during the war with its victors and defeaters. Therefore, the United States gradually began to climb the ladder of global hegemony on the back of the Europeans themselves, but full attainment to the throne of the world had not yet taken place, but needed a second page with a lot of ruin and blood.
World War II broke out because the Germans were angry at the restrictions imposed on them by their defeat in World War I, and then a new round broke out between Germany and its enemies at the hands of the Nazi German leader Adolf Hitler, and Hitler soon declared war by forcibly annexing the lands of his neighbors, and did not delay long to take a memorial photo in front of the Eiffel Tower, announcing the arrival of his troops in the heart of Paris. At the same time, the United States was on the way to adopting a position similar to what happened during the World War The first: neutrality at first, then a necessary clash.
On December 7, 1941, the Japanese Air Force and Navy launched its famous attack on the U.S. fleet in the Hawaiian Islands, after Washington decided to cut off fuel supplies to Japan. The United States entered the war, and the Allies quickly tilted their efforts and their efforts were crowned with victory, but the most important thing for Washington was not the victory itself, but what came after it.
Marshall.. Europe under the umbrella of America
After the end of World War II, all the threats to democratic countries were not gone. Hitler is gone, yes, but Soviet leader Joseph Stalin was no less dangerous in the eyes of Americans. Worried that the communist East would precede them into a devastated Europe, Americans were determined to provide comprehensive economic support to Europe, giving the old continent everything it wanted to get back on its feet.
This support began with the so-called "Truman Doctrine", and was sponsored by US President Harry Truman as an American commitment to supporting democracies in the face of authoritarian regimes, and then the most important economic project Europe knew after the war: the Marshall Plan.
Americans realized that Stalin did not share their democratic and capitalist visions, and that Europe could not help itself build what was destroyed by the flames of war. U.S. General George Marshall asked diplomat George Kenan to develop an economic aid plan for Europe with two goals: to help the European ally and prevent it from falling into the hands of the Soviet Union if those affected by the European economic crisis were drawn to communist rhetoric from Moscow.
It may be surprising to learn that the Marshall Plan to save Europe's economy was also proposed to the Soviet Union itself, as the French and British wished that Stalin would join them in benefiting from the project for fear of a rupture between Eastern and Western Europe.
In the end, the United States provided $13 billion in aid to Europe over 4 years, distributed to 16 countries. The Marshall Plan helped Europe grow and modernize industries and infrastructure, and created cooperation between European countries, as well as between them and the United States.
We can say that the balance of power changed after the end of World War II, it is true that Europe succeeded in eliminating Nazism, but it came out of the war divided, with its western part in need of the American umbrella, and its eastern part attracted to the orbit of Soviet communism, and then the war produced a bipolar system: Moscow and Washington.
For many years, the Cold War and its calculations overshadowed the whole world, and Western fear of the spread of communism strengthened the alliance between the United States and its allies in Europe, especially France, Britain and by extension West Germany.
In the sixties, the godfather of the French Fifth Republic, General Charles de Gaulle, arrived openly wanting to rebel against Washington and try to forge a third path that was neither subject to America nor attracted to Moscow at the same time.
This desire was not only for de Gaulle, although he was the most prominent advocate, as the call spread in many European countries for a degree of independence, including the "Ost Politics" policy in West Germany, sponsored by the Social Democratic Chancellor Willy Brandt, and opened the door to normalization with East Germany and calm with Moscow.
America did not stand idly by in the face of these European moves, as it worked to weaken France and force it to follow the economic norms it enacted for Europe, and the opportunity to strengthen this American orientation came after the collapse of the Soviet Union, especially since the unification of Germany came to constitute an additional restriction on France's influence in leading Europe.
Washington then embarked on the rehabilitation and integration of the Warsaw Pact countries into the European Union under the terms of a capitalist transformation and bilateral relations that did not give way to a different model sponsored by France, now constrained France, or a lonely Germany, or Britain, far from the heart of the continent and closest in any case to Washington.
Who is the enemy? Debate between Washington and Brussels
NATO was initially born of French and British desire after World War II. At the time, the Russians had not left the territory they controlled, which posed a danger to Europeans wary of the idea that Russia would not leave the territory it had controlled.
In September 1949, after the outbreak of the Korean War that resulted in two Korean states appearing fiercely hostile, Western countries rushed to create an integrated military structure, the role of the alliance was to "keep the Russians out of Europe, the Americans engaged, and the Germans in it," drafted by British General Hastings Esmay, NATO's first secretary-general.
Washington is fast becoming the backbone of NATO, how not and is helping Europe itself build its power.
But the tension quickly found its way into relations between America and its European allies at the height of the Indochina War (Southeast Asia), as France then asked its allies to fund its military action under the umbrella of NATO, and the Americans agreed to this on the condition that they refer to them on how to use it, which Paris did not like.
The alliance remained essential even after the fall of the Soviets, and Europe viewed American survival as healthy for its security. Nevertheless, America gradually disengaged from Europe by closing many of its military bases.
When the September 11, 2001 attacks occurred, for the first time in its history, NATO would invoke Article V of the Washington Treaty, which states that all members of the alliance must assist any member attacked. Although NATO participated in many military operations, especially in the Mediterranean and the Indian Ocean, and entered the Afghanistan war in defense of Washington, the latter gradually lost its desire to adhere to NATO.
The United States possessed superior military capabilities at the height of its victorious exit from the Cold War, and then discovered over time that it unconditionally wanted a white card to intervene wherever and in any way, considering itself in an open war with terrorism around the world.
The Iraq war in 2003 was an explicit embodiment of that American unilateral doctrine, as Washington proceeded with the support of Britain without the consent of France and Germany, and even strained relations with Paris and Berlin as a result of their insistence not to enter the war, while some fragile and newly independent former Soviet Union countries participated for fear of losing American support in confronting Iraq, and the Netherlands, Denmark and Australia agreed to send troops to Iraq.
By the second decade of the new millennium, differences began to appear more between the main countries of NATO, and with Russia's military intervention in Georgia in 2008 and in Crimea in 2014, it became clear that the Russian regime seeks to rehabilitate its presence on the European continent, and the dispute began between America and Europe over what enemy threatens the alliance, whether it is terrorism, the rise of China or the increasing Russian interventions, and European countries began to strengthen their military cooperation among themselves, such as the Netherlands and Germany, which founded Military brigades with forces from both countries, Italy and France, which have established military manufacturing companies competing with the United States.
With Russia's military operation in Ukraine, the alliance began to come back to life, Europe and America found a common enemy again, and it was a sure opportunity to gather capabilities and direct fire in one place.
But this cooperation is no longer shaping U.S. priorities preoccupied with the stability of the international system in general, and the rise of China in particular. Washington's dissatisfaction with supporting Ukraine quickly emerged, culminating in the current Trump presidency, who said few NATO countries had paid what they should and that compromise was the only way to end the war.
Heiko Maas, a former German foreign minister, said that Trump's "America First" slogan should have an equally clear slogan, "Europe First." From a European perspective, Trump poses a risk by rapidly withdrawing the U.S. security umbrella from the continent, which is now forcing Europeans to move quickly to form their own military force.
But the old continent is experiencing many problems, economic, political and social, including the rise of far-right currents, the number one enemy of the European Union as an institution.
The European Union is betting on reaching an agreement in Ukraine in which the Americans do not play the only starring role, guarantee Ukraine's European interests, and guarantee the security of the old continent.
Whether Trump backs down or decides to renew support, Europeans have only one choice: finding a way to face tomorrow's world without relying on the protection of Washington, which seems to be grappling enemies far from Europe, leaving the continent to face its enemy alone.